Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

An anonymous reader writes "The British government's educational IT authority has issued a report advising schools in the country not to upgrade their classroom or office systems to Windows Vista or Office 2007. According to this InformationWeek story, the British Educational Communications and Technology Agency says costs for Vista and Office 2007 'are significant and the benefits remain unclear.' Instead, Becta is advising British schools to take a long look at Linux and open source suites like OpenOffice.org."

Not to mention, and sorry for taking this further off-topic, deep-fried mars bars and deep-fried pizzas. Us Scots know how make scary food. My personal favourite, from a recent visit to Edinburgh, vegetarian haggis samosas (from a baked potato shop at the top of Cockburn St, if anyone is curious).

Thor [harringtonmuseum.org.uk], the very first US ballistic missile system, was deployed between 1959 and 1963 from bases in the UK. These were the days before intercontinental ballistic missiles. The missiles were controlled by the UK but the warheads were controlled by the US. A dual-key system was in place that required both UK and US authorisation to launch.

no, we own the missiles and we can launch them, however the missiles rely on a US guidance system, the warheads could be put into cruise missiles or bombers but the trident missiles (the UK doesn't use ICBMs, but instead maintains global missile strike ability by keeping nuclear submarines hidden all over the world.) need US satellites for guidance. Without the US codes the missiles wouldn't be able to find their targets.

Yes, but they're British nuclear weapons. Before you could launch them, therefore, someone would have to come out and knock on the silo door to say that the power cables were never actually connected during installation, so they need to dig up the street to connect them--but first they have to get permission from the city council, which takes three weeks, and then six weeks later after the work's finally done, your actual launch technician is a toothless yob named Nigel with an Exeter City FC tattoo, who promptly says "Well, it's a nuclear warhead, innit? More than my job's worth, pushing that button." He then re-disconnects your power cables and fucks off for another six weeks while you call the same number over and over again trying to get someone else to come out, but only reaching "Kenneth" in Mumbai.......sorry, this kind of turned into a rant about my Virgin Media cable TV service. Carry on.

but first they have to get permission from the city council, which takes three weeks, and then six weeks later after the work's finally done

..but first they have to get permission from the city council, which takes three weeks and then falls into negotiation because the church parish put in an automatic complaint about how this would effect the environment and beautification of the city. So it then goes up for debate for six weeks while you then to work on a convincing argument in a town meeting for diggin

I know the parent poster is joking, but often you find Microsoft equals US economy. Microsoft is actually not even a US company anymore, as they launder their money in Ireland or wherever to pay less US tax.

I would like to point out that Red Hat, Sun Microsystems, Novell, FSF, Linux Foundation are all based in the US. So good for US.

This was not done in a vacuum but because of hard work. Well done to the Open Rights Group, UKUUG, Dr John Pugh MP, FSFE, the LUGs and everyone else who has been trying to get Becta and the government to know that there are alternatives to Microsoft.

Unfortunately, we've been down this road many times before. A large Microsoft customer wants to renegotiate its Windows licenses, but Microsoft won't cut the price. The customer threatens to dump Windows and go all Linux, and then Microsoft gives substantial discounts on what the customer actually wanted all along.
This sounds like nothing more than another contract renegotiation with Microsoft.

The angle is very different here though IMHO: from the report [becta.org.uk], I got the idea that it was more about the fact

The head of IT at my sons school (here in the UK) recently told me of their irritation at being told they had to use Microsoft only software for their network and teaching. The result was a network that was a nightmare to keep secure (you try and keeping hundreds of enthusiastic kids from finding ways round microsoft security), and poor quality teaching tools. Had he had his way there would be a linux sever running the network and email, XP classroom machines (not linux just yet), openoffice, and python in the programming classes.

As it is they have windows server, Exchange, MSoffice, Dreamweaver (after a successful revolt against frontpage), and VB.

My 7 year old Son's school (West Sussex, UK) approached me for advice on replacing a very ageing Windows server that was hosting all the students' work. The school manages their IT budget independently of County Hall and so can make their own choices for equipment, software and suppliers. The school did have a quote from the UK's top supplier of computer equipment to schools (RM), but with the quoted cost to supply and install being several thousand pounds (yeah, for one server for a primary school!), the school felt they needed a second opinion.

To cut a long story short, the school now has a custom-built server running Linux (CentOS 5) with RAID 1 mirrored drives in trayless caddies AND a spare 'cold swap' chassis that the school computer technician can use if the main server dies (which can then be repaired at leisure). Total cost was around £500

Please state which part of my spec was 'skimped' - oh, sorry, you can't as you have no details of what I spec'd.

All parts are branded and there is a spare chassis for the IT technician to use while parts are exchanged under warranty - something they are fully capable of doing. *You* may need a third party to replace a dead PSU, but this school doesn't - in fact, with their kit they can be up and running in a matter of minutes rather than waiting for an 8-hour call out service.

Sure, if you do not have the skills in house you may need third party support - this school has in house resources.

"A quote for £000's is money spent on peace of mind". Eh? Not if it's inappropriate - or do *you* say 'yes' to every quote you receive without weighing up the options.

You do not have all the fact so are in no position to make specific judgements. Maybe you work for a maintenance company?

Caves are there, caves will always be there. Why would anybody want to live in anything but a cave. You do not need those new newfangled houses built of timber or bricks, the cave is good enough, so continue to rent space in the M$ hole in the ground.

Perhaps you have never heard of the term innovation or maybe they way M$ keeps using perhaps they don't really understand what it means.

I heard exact the same sort of nonsense about DOS or Unix and even for, fuck sack, about low res green screen monitors, g

``kids probably still need to learn to use Office 2007 because, like it or not, that's what the Real World (TM) uses. ''

When I was at school in the seventies, the bright kids got an education. The less bright girls learnt to type, because there would always be work for copy typists, and the less bright boys learnt to use a lathe, because here in Birmingham (England, not Alabama) there would always be work in the car industry.

I wonder how that's working out? I was taught transferrable skills, like how to learn, and thirty years later I'm still learning. Meanwhile, there's no car industry and copy typing, shorthand and the rest may as well be candle making for all the traction they have.

I don't know what software my children will use in the workplace in ten or twenty years' time, and if I did I'd be making a fortune producing it. I don't know what JOBS they'll be doing in ten or twenty years time, perhaps (indeed probably) in a very different landscape to where we are now. What I do know is that flexibility, adaptability, the ability to learn and reskill and change, are going to be vital in a world where the linear career is dead. And that's why the best thing you can learn is how to learn.

So as a matter of policy, whatever software the kids are using at school, we use something else at home. School right now is Office 2003 on XP, so home is iWork '08 on Mac. Spreadsheet problems I show them how to do by hand, and I'm about to start showing them how to knock up code to do it (and I'm choosing a language they're highly unlikely to use in school: I'm torn between Scheme and Processing). We did a poster project with Keynote, but also with a razor blade and cowgum.

You can teach your children ``the workplace'' if you like. I think you Americans call those sorts of lessons ``shop''. Someone who has a good degree in a pure science or a legitimate humanity can learn to use Word to a sufficient standard in a morning. Someone who knows Word, but can't use a library or do calculus, is welcome to try learning those in a morning. How many successful authors can touch type, and how many just did hunt and peck? Same principle.

How did Brunel build the Great Western without the help of Office? Which was more important: using Office, or being a great engineer?

And before anyone makes the point, I realise these aren't binary, black/white choices. But in terms of mentality, they are: do you regard education as about learning the direct skills of today, or the ability to learn the skills of tomorrow? There's a word for people with the first sort of education, or indeed training, and the word is `poor'.

Education is about providing long-term skills. Teaching Office 2007 is simple short-term training - anyone with OpenOffice skills can easily pick up another office package such as Office 2007 very quickly.

Well, that's all well and good but the kids probably still need to learn to use Office 2007 because, like it or not, that's what the Real World (TM) uses. Because the Real World uses Office 2007 other companies are copying that UI design and implementing it across their own pieces of software.

Here is why this is utter bullshit: First, because the world is avoiding Office 2007 like the plague. It is an abomination. It is incompatible. It prevents people from doing what they should do with a word processor - writing.

Second, at the time these kids come out of school, the world will _not_ be using Office 2007. In ten years time, Microsoft will have lost the battle against open standards, and the world will be using either Open Office, or whatever Open Office compatible software Apple ships for fre

A vulnerability has been found in MS-Stick 1.0 that may allow malicious attackers to insert a piece of their stick into the original, thus causing further damage when the stick is poked in the eye.

This so-called DDoS (Deeper Destruction of Sclera) attack can be prevented by installing Stick Service Pack 1, which adds an outer layer of additional protection to the stick thus preventing third parties from snapping the stick and re-assembling it to include their extension.

A tool is available to check your stick to see whether it has been affected by a malicious attack. The tool detects stick size changes - ask your stationery supplier for the '30cm ruler' tool.

Having used both Office and OpenOffice.org extensively, I'm not really convinced that OO.o is really superior. Now, it is of course better in that it's open source, and it uses openly-documented file formats. But the user experience of OO.o is still lacking in many respects. Even on fast systems, it's slow and bloated.

I think it would be better to teach these children how to use LaTeX. It offers the openness of OO.o, but allows for the preparation of much more professional documentation. It would also be very useful for those students who wish to pursue university studies, as most math, science and engineering papers are formatted using LaTeX.

OpenOffice is better for schools because it's free. No school ever has enough money for everything it wants to do, and paying the Microsoft Tax on enough machines for their students to work on in class can be a big drain on very limited resources. OpenOffice is similar enough in look, feel and use to MSOffice (Except for 2007, of course.) that it's easy for somebody who knows one to work with the other, so it's a reasonable choice.

Actually, the parent suggests teaching LaTeX as an alternative. Somehow I doubt it would be feasible, but personally, I wish people knew there was a better way to write than putting everything in word.

Text is for writing, TeX is for formatting, word processors? Well, they're for what's left.

Yes, but I suggested OOo because it's good enough for most people. Most people not only don't need the kind of fine control that LATex gives you, they'd resent being forced to learn it and resist using it. It'd be nice, of course, if it were available for the few who'd want or need it, but schools have to concentrate on what most of their students need if they're going to do any good.

Agreed. "Word processing" is one of the biggest jokes foisted on computer users ever. For everyone but dedicated, experienced users it is a huge waste of time, whereas markup like LaTeX or something simpler like reStructed Text is instantly learnable and gives the same results for most uses. In my opinion, "word processing" was much more functional and usable 25 years ago.Microsoft Word, aside from being a hideous monstrosity of an application I wouldn't wish on my enemies is like using an F-15 to drive

I think the biggest disconnect with MS Word is what it's capable of compared to what it's good at. I constantly see people trying to make MS Word do things it doesn't do particularly well and getting frustrated in the process.

Credit where it's due: MS Word is a good word processing engine. You can type things, check your spelling (it's often right), check your grammar (it's often wrong), and print. These are good things that MS Word does well, as long as your document isn't too long.

MS Word is capable of tracking changes in a document so you can know who made what edits and when. This does not make it a document versioning system, yet that is often how I see it used. It's a nice feature for a writer or a small workgroup but entirely ineffective for a larger group or over a longer time. And it will bite you hard if you send documents externally in native MS Office formats without killing all the evidence of previous edits.

MS Word is capable of generating tables and embedding graphics or spreadsheet objects. It's just not very good at it. Between different users on different systems (or the same user on the same system) it seems to have its own mind about how things should be displayed. Anything embedded can change on a whim, and will change provided you open the document often enough. Which feeds right into the next point.

MS Word is capable of doing document layout. But it's a complete nightmare. Lines disappear and reappear; text boxes change size and shape for no apparent reason; fonts randomly switch from 10-pt sans to 12-pt serif because they feel like it; auto-numbering decides it knows better than you what numbers go where; and objects resize and replace themselves entirely according to their own rules (which are confidential and proprietary).

MS Word knows better than you what you want to do with it, and if you want to something else, well, you're obviously mistaken. It really makes me miss the days of WordPerfect 5. I appreciated and made good use of the fact that I could see the codes embedded in the text, could tell from the codes when something would be bold or italic and not have to worry about text randomly changing format later

that is because microsoft's idea of 'word lite' (ie wordpad or works) seems to be 'can't be compatible with word'. i work for the it department in a school. i have to use ooo on my linux box to convert most of the 'non word' documents that kids bring in, because word stuffs them up so badly. ooo doesn't convert all of them perfectly, but 99% of the time it is much better than word's poor excuse for a conversion.on a side note, the number of kids bringing in odf documents has been slowly but surely increasin

The MS-Office 2007 interface isn't really innovative. It's more the bastard love-child of several new interfaces, including (but not limited to) Apple's iWork interface. So it's not new, it's not innovative.

It's better, that's for sure. But really, MS has done what they've always done: based their work on others', and called it their own.

I was using the term innovation in its most neutral sense - there is nothing about the new interface that I like. On the other hand there hasn't been much change between Office 5.0 and 2003 (IMO Office 97 is still the best). They introduced Layout View and some rather pointless features along the way and changed the document structure from time to time to ensure that everyone had to upgrade sometime. Now they came up with a new layout which is supposed to get rid of all this UI bloat which they collected ov

The ribbon just reminded me of the toolbar in iWorks. Maybe it's the organization, or the simplicity or the layout. There's just something to it that seems reminiscent of iWorks.

Really, I should've mentioned Adobe's recent products, which are more of a direct rip-off than the iWorks stuff. I guess I'm just more sensitized to iWorks since I've been using it (and been very impressed by it).

Maybe, maybe not. Microsoft do deserve kudos for dropping it into their flagship application. I've only read the reviews, not tried it. From here it looks like the kind of bet Apple have made repeatedly in every aspect of their products. It's a significant or even major change in the interface, ante'ing the status quo. I get the strong impression that wherever the bits and pieces come from, they hang together rather than separately, and that's not an easy effect to achieve.

There's a difference between "borrowing" and "ripping off." Usually it's involved in the character of the person doing the deed.In Microsoft's case, they rip off. They don't really even improve. They have built a (very successful) business around stealing other peoples' ideas, while contributing *nothing* back. It's not like they are building on the work of others. They copy the works of others, and pretend *they* invented it. They don't give credit (part of the obligation of "borrowing"). They don't admit

Here here! I've recently started using LaTeX at university and although the learning curve is a little steep it is an excellent tool. There are plenty of existing templates to use for writing reports, the image and layout tools are ticky to get the hang of at first but again very powerful. I used these tutorials [andy-roberts.net] and they pretty much covered everything I needed

When it comes to references aswell BiBTeX is very handy for handling them all

I think you're completely right about the fit and finish of OO being klunky, and it is slow for some tasks. But I have recently started to wonder: so what? I really think it's now good enough for most people for most tasks. My wife's new laptop has OO rather than office, and it's fine. When my son had to make a birthday party invitation, he started in Word, grew frustrated (as did I trying to help him -- it was a two-fold card so we had to rotate part of the page 180 degrees). We tried OO and found that the

I really think it's now good enough for most people for most tasks. My wife's new laptop has OO rather than office, and it's fine.

That's what I do routinely for relatives ; want a word processor ? Sure, here is my OO.o CD, I'll install it no problem, my pleasure. Oh, you meant MS Office ? I can install it for sure, but you hand me the money first so I can go and buy the boxed version. Find a WHAT ? Nope, sorry, no way, I'm not breaking laws for you. OO.o will do ? Fine, let's go.

So far, all the persons I equiped with OO.o have stuck with it. None have reverted to MS-Office. Maybe they resent me, but that's a proof that they didn'

I wholeheartedly agree. We need to stop touting OO as a good substitute for Office.

Office isn't very good, and for OOo to do *worse* than it is a pretty miserable achievement. We need to get some fresh faces involved with the project to either clean things up (a la Firefox), or start from scratch to build an application that's got an overall "friendlier" appearance.

"Lack of features" isn't even the biggest issue here. Despite being much "simpler", I find AbiWord to be vastly superior to OOo, even though its featureset is comparatively limited.

The GIMP has been stumbling along for years upon years, and has never really managed to reach a state of usefulness to designers. However, in a very short period of time, two guys wrote an f---ing amazing shareware "Photoshop substitute [pixelmator.com]" for Mac OS. Granted, it's not photoshop, but unlike The GIMP, or OOo, it's fast, has a good UI, and even though it lacks some of Photoshop's more advanced features, it's more than adequate for my needs.

It's not open-source or cross-platform, but seriously..... two guys wrote it in their spare time!

I'll also ignore that comment about teaching primary schoolers LaTeX. I'm a reasonably savvy university student, and I find LaTeX absolutely unusable. It's got to be one of the most difficult and convoluted pieces of software in widespread use. It's great in concept, but make one tiny syntax error, and the compiler blows up with a 2-page long indecipherable error message. Most C compliers have better error handling.

I know it's apocryphal to even make this point, but is it possible that there is a point beyond which the basic Office-style apps simply cannot be improved? This is a serious question, not troll. Given the constraints of near-horizon technology (no AI, imperfect voice recognition, no brain-computer interfaces), how much better can word-processor, spreadsheet and slideshow programs get? Leave aside databases, design and payout apps, and other things bundled in MS Office for the sake of simplicity. Is the

I know it's apocryphal to even make this point, but is it possible that there is a point beyond which the basic Office-style apps simply cannot be improved? This is a serious question, not troll. Given the constraints of near-horizon technology (no AI, imperfect voice recognition, no brain-computer interfaces), how much better can word-processor, spreadsheet and slideshow programs get? Leave aside databases, design and payout apps, and other things bundled in MS Office for the sake of simplicity. Is there a point at which the three basic apps couldn't get any better?
I'd be very interested to hear people's thoughts on this because I'm guessing it will bring out all sorts of interesting suggestions for improvements that have never occurred me.

Ahh... the voice of sanity..
Office is not a DTP app. Excel is not a database. There are circumstances where Office is used for everything, but it's like trying to build a boat with a swiss army knife. Better than nothing, but not the same thing as having the right tool for the job.

I think it would be better to teach these children how to use LaTeX. It offers the openness of OO.o, but allows for the preparation of much more professional documentation. It would also be very useful for those students who wish to pursue university studies, as most math, science and engineering papers are formatted using LaTeX.

Totally agree, but not necessarily children. Part of a science/engineering/mathematics major should be learning how to write using LaTeX. I've learned by myself and I use it for pap

I think it would be better to teach these children how to use LaTeX. It offers the openness of OO.o, but allows for the preparation of much more professional documentation.

My boss at a former job pointed this out to me. LaTeX follows a programmer's paradigm. First you write the source, then you have to compile and link it to produce what you really want. This is fine for programmers and people who don't mind learning the ins and outs of how computers work. But it's needlessly complicated for someone wh

LaTeX is just a tool. I think it's worth reminding ourselves that all these document editors are tools that can and should be easy enough to learn and master "on the go". I am saying this because I have the impression that some guys with CompSci background put too much emphasis on, for example, LaTeX, and forget that the physics, chemistry or electronics student uses them to write their homeworks or their scientific papers - but what matters to them is the science they learn at the university. Whether they

Every single technology-aware teacher in Britain is at the BETT show at the moment - the trade fair for the educational IT industry. And the Eee PC is the star of the show. Rebadged it may be under various resellers' names, but it's the same old Linux-based Eee PC, complete with OpenOffice and - more significantly - 802.11g and Firefox, ready to access any number of educational webapps. Of course, it doesn't hurt that in a time of reduced Government spending, the Eee is also ridiculously cheap.

So along comes Becta and says "actually, you should look at free alternatives to Windows/Office". When they said that three years ago, everyone went "uh-huh" and carried on buying what they'd always bought. This time, there's an alternative. This is the first serious challenge to Microsoft in UK schools since the demise of the Acorn Archimedes.

The EEEPC labelled as the 'RM Minibook'. I think it is about time. As Nicolas Negroponte found in his landmark studies of how technology can aid education (and his subsequent laptop project), there is only one ratio that matters, children need their own individual computers to really get to know them and use them effectively.

In Britain, the government gives poorer kids meals and uniforms, laptops may well be next.

The supported use of FOSS software could make a radical difference. Recycled hardware running free operating systems and applications could reduce the cost of student PCs to almost zero, and truly put computing within the reach of every child.

I have several computers at home that my children use for school-related activities. TOTAL cost of each (hardware, OS, office suite, image manipulation) is that of the monitor. These boxes are absolutely fit for purpose, and would otherwise be landfill.

My children regard computing at home as a commodity, which funnily enough, it is, if you step outside the wierd monopolistic force-bubble that is our educational computing practice.

The only excuse for the situation in our schools, the only reasoning that could possibly hold water, is 'They should use what they'll use at work'. This is short, snappy, and is accepted easily by those only peripherally involved in the question. I don't think it bears examination though. Some thoughts:

A trite one:

I don't believe any otherwise suitable candidate has ever been passed over because they were trained on the wrong spreadsheet, but if they were they should count themselves lucky to have escaped. They are more likely to be passed over if they didn't do well on the coursework because their parents couldn't afford to give them access to a PC.

A less trite one:

Office 2007's new UI, if it achieves the any sort of foothold on corporate desktops, will render all experience of word processing at schools until now totally obsolete. Or will it? No of course not - conversion courses will help the latest intake drive the latest software.

If this change can be handled between versions of the same product, then exactly the same case can be made for conversion between products. So (for example):

Train on OpenOffice (or other product if it's free at least for educational and domestic use, and runs on a free operating system.) With the money you save on buying no Microsoft Office or Windows licences build and deploy short conversion courses for people about to leave school, getting them up to speed on the current commercial favourites. This would spit out kids with more up-to-date experience of the commercial softwarescape than the current policy.

The benefits of this approach come from breaking the lock-in: commoditisation spreading children's access to computing in a way that otherwise only massive subsidy could (fail to) achieve; our children, their teachers and parents able to take advantage of the freely-given, high-quality work of a global community, while ending their education better trained on the latest commercial tools than they are today.

That's not an excuse, I'm not wasting tax so they can become an extension of Microsoft's sales dept!They should be learning about IT! They should learn a little about different Operating Systems, maybe a bit of html, how to read a manual (very important for anything tech related), etc.

What do we currently have you might be asking? 1 year of learning that a monitor is an output and a keyboard is an input. The IT education in England is a joke.

The sad thing is that the interpretation of the curriculum requirements is variable - at my son's primary school they have used their ICT suite to research their history projects, write letters to 'pen pals', compile brochures for imaginary businesses as partof a maths project and even to edit a film made about the history of the school and village as part of a funded project that even had professional film makers and editors visit the school and spend time teaching various techniques. Sure, they have learn

Said by TFA:"Becta is advising British schools to take a long look at Linux and open source suites like OpenOffice.org."

I'm sure they will take a look at Linux and promptly forget about it as soon as they realize that they would have to fire their existing Windows-only IT staff and/or hire new staff to support it. After that they will take a long look at their agreement with Microsoft and realize that just ditching MS Office will not help either since their current volume license agreement is a package that includes Office too.

In order to *really* save money you have to go for the full monty and almost completely ditch all Microsoft products, which requires a talented IT staff. My experience with K-12 Education IT is that most IT staffs in this category can't make this work.

In the British public sector, people don't get fired.Well, they do, but they tend to have to commit serious crime for it to happen. Kiddy-fiddling, murder, that sort of thing (little things like defrauding the taxpayer of tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds tend not to cause much of a fuss).

It also doesn't matter two shits what the IT staff want, because they don't make the decisions. That's why we have organisations like BECTA, who (thankfully) have a relatively level head about such things and can tel

Well if the IT skill of the current school staff is something approaching zero (with outstanding exceptions) or they have little budget for staff at all, then replacing badly supported Windows with badly supported Linux might not be too bad, at least the kids can't fill them up with spyware, pirated games and so on.

I'm an ICT teacher in the UK and I totally agree. We are trying to teach skills and not packages. But it is more than that, you can;t teach kids everything in school and being able to access the skills and tools that you implement in school at home is essential to complement what they are learning in school. After two years of quite severe debate, our school now uses several OSS packages and the kids are given copies of the OpenEducationDisc. Teachers and students can't believe it is free. I now have kids making music, 2D and 3D graphics and actually able to complete written assignments at home as they have something to write with and open word docs with (OOo). For me propriety formats do not have a foot to stand on when you take the home situation into hand.

Let's see: the demise of HD-DVD was a blow. Then the fact that MS is associated with those trying to undermine a charity (OLPC) will certainly not generate a whole lot of good will. Then this little chink in the armor, in the british schools. And then there was that class action lawsuit against Microsoft because of the Xbox Live network downtimes. A year that barely started, and already generated all this sh*t for MS!

However will this year continue, for MS? I hear that a lot of disillusioned users of Vista just decided to get macs. A little number, perhaps, but still an erosion of Microsoft marketshare. And then there's Firefox that's increasing its marketshare every month a little bit.

As long as we're questioning the educational value of a "standard" OS, let's question the educational value of "standard" end-user software. Face it, 10 year olds aren't very interested in playing with a word processor or spreadsheet. How about something that will actually engage and challenge them? Even if they don't go for the XO, schools should consider installing some of the software [laptop.org] from that system. Which is not terribly tied to the OLPC project, or even to Linux. OLPC's innovative user interface [laptop.org] also deserves a close look.

The kids don't play with word processors or spreadsheets - they use them as tools to help them with curriculum work - such as writing history reports or using them to collate stats. One time I sat in an IT classroom (I used to work as a freelance IT technician for the schools in my county), the pupils were gathering numeric information in Excel to help with a history project.

Apart from learning the basic WP and spreadsheet skills, schools ICT teaching is not a series of 'how to use Word' sessions.

Damn - I managed to lose the first para of my reply, which was explaining that in my son's school the approach taken to IT teaching is very practical and that I have seen examples in other schools where the approach has been far from sterile.

People seem to be somewhat mistakenly making direct comparisons between OpenOffice and MS Office.

I do not deny for one minute that there are a minority of specialised MS Office users who write macros and VB programs for which OpenOffice would not be suitable - but for the majority of MS Office users that do use only about 10% of its features, OO is a perfectly good substitute.

And dare I mention one important fact. I work in the IT industry and have a large group of friends who also (mostly) work in high tech industry. All of them have MS Office on their home PCs but not one of them has actually paid for it - they've either borrowed a corporate license from their workplace or use cracks of the Internet. In my experience, when these people compare MS Office to OpenOffice, they forget that MS Office should probably have cost them a couple of hundred dollars/pounds/euros whereas OO is entirely free. If they were forced to pay for their copies of MS office, they would be a lot more inclined to at least give OO a try.

Like most people that advocate OOo, you really have no idea how Office is used, do you?You think people sit around writing macros for themselves? Maybe some, but every company i've worked for in the last 10 years has had (literally) hundreds, even thousands of documents on file servers with embedded macros for use by the entire company.

The Accounting departments are particularly notorious for this, as are Human resources. They have create macro embedded documents for vacation request forms, health care an

...and it's my expectation that my government takes a serious look at Open Source software in all public-funded areas such that money going into the Microsoft coffers might instead be used to pay for better cancer treatment in UK hospitals and/or better funded schools.

I do not deny that IT staff who support Windows day-to-day in the Public Sector would need to be trained to support Linux. But I'm sure this additional cost would soon be outweighed by the monies that no longer need to be spent on Microsoft

At least in the United States, computer training in schools is already lacking. More and more students lack general or even useful knowledge of using business software. With many businesses already using Microsoft Office products (Maybe not 2007), wouldn't it be in the best interest for everyone to teach kids what the working environment actually uses? Sure OpenOffice and Linux is used, but 90% of OEM machines use Windows and Office. About the same percentage of businesses use the same.
The cost of upgradi

You know, when I was growing up in the 1980s just beceause we didn't have to have Vista and Office 2007 or whatever didn't make me totally helpless in the workplace. The first time I had a class that used the computer writing lab in 7th grade was the old blue-screen WordPerfect. The first time I did any computer programming at school was BASIC on a TRS-80. The first time I worked with a spreadsheet was in Lotus 1,2,3 on a Mac in 6th grade. Somehow I managed to be able to translate these non-Microsoft skills into being able to use what "90% of the workplace" uses, and somehow it didn't manage ending up being "wasteful".

On the contrary, I think the computing diversity we had in the 80s is sorely missed.

If the local schools switched to Linux and OpenOffice, the time spent training students on OpenOffice and Linux to get jobs with the state, which provides 70% of the jobs in our state, the four years spent doing business computer classes would be almost wasteful.

If that is the case. The schools are teaching the wrong things. They should teach concepts not particular applications. Word Processing is understanding the following things: opening files, closing files, printing files. How paragraphs work, wor

The site's in French, but FF numbers are the lower in the UK than anywhere else in Europe -- and according to this report, it actually shrunk this fall. (Search for "Royaume-Uni" for the UK's numbers).

Last time I checked, IE's still number one in the UK, and its share seems to be growing. Anyone know why?

And yeah, I know FF isn't Linux or OO -- but its IS free, and it IS open source. And IMHO, its

Sorry to spoil the party but what BECTA say counts for bugger all as they have no power beyond recommendation.

I, am the admin of a UK school that has been running Linux on all of our servers for the last three years. It's brilliant! Uptimes are long, hacking is minimal and we save a bloody fortune in licences. Centos backend running LDAP,DHCP,DNS, Mandriva boxes for Samba and Zimbra (Open Source version) running on our mail server. The desktops (much to my despair) are still running XP but the curriculum software our teachers use won't run via WINE. The IT club however is going to be running Ubuntu or Fedora 8 so at least some will get the point but I digress from the point that I wish to make which is "Building Schools for the Future" or "Fucking-up Schools for the Future" as it's often to referred to by those of us that the council claim have been fully consulted when in fact we haven't heard a word.

Building Schools for the Future (BSF) is the governments plan to scratch build new school buildings for every school in the UK. Sounds great doesn't it but what they don't mention is that the building of these schools is a PFI (Private Finance Initiative) project that will lead to these schools; a) costing more long term than keeping them public and b) being run by private companies with the tax payer footing the bill (and the CEO's bonus).

On an ICT front, computing services will be tendered out to private companies along the lines of Capita and RM. Let's play spot the Linux oriented company in this lot shall we? Oh right, they're aren't any and that probably explains why leading edge BSF schools aren't running Linux. Whole counties are run on SIMS (School Information Management System) and it doesn't run MySQL or Postgres as the backend (Take a guess). The collection of data from schools will also be centralised to the governments education department which will require compatible software and all this is happening now.

And here folks is the problem. BECTA have been spouting on about Linux for years now and you will be hard pressed to find anything except Windows in schools because once you get to a certain level of decision maker no-one cares as it's just a few extra zeros on the end of number that's already very large. Part of this is probably down to the fact that no-one actually seems to know how much BSF is going to cost even though they are trying to sign service companies up to it. You can probably throw whatever figure you want at it and it will get paid because, like the Olympics, it's a Government prestige project that the tax-payer will underwrite. Obviously, if Linux did look too promising, educational XP licences would be extended and discounted to ensure that whatever converting cost, it would be more than the status quo.

I'll believe Linux in schools when, and only when I see it. Until then it's a fairy tale.

Because the assumption is that what, exactly - Microsoft and entities hurting for funding are *always* engaging in backdoor negotiations? What happens when body X that's published a report giving a fair number of substantiated reasons not to go Microsoft suddenly turns around and is all of sudden using the latest Microsoft products? Body X loses credibility for taking that which they've disparaged the second they get a good deal, and Microsoft gets pegged as not only acting completely paranoid and frightene

>> Sounds like they are negotiation with Microsoft for cheaper licenses
Yes, can we have 'obvious reaction' mod points. This is as insightful as banging on about a Beowulf cluster. It's a sensible report about real stuff. Why should my kid get taught that computer == Microsoft? She uses openoffice, firefox etc at home and gets on fine for her work. Why should her school haemorrhage money at Vista when it is not necessary? They've got better things to spend money on. Like teaching the teachers how to

Perhaps you might have been "insightful" two years ago, but Linux (and FOSS in general) is much more accepted and deployed in real-life situations these days. Nowadays, especially with Vista, people are serious when they talk about switching to Linux. It's no longer a negotiation tactic. It's *fact*. It's honest.

I've helped with Linux migrations for businesses that didn't even know Linux existed two years ago. Believe me, people are *tired* of taking it up the ass from Microsoft.

Although, according to the warrant database, Charles only has a photocopier, no computer. The Queen apparently has an IBM machine, although that could be a server for all we know, if it is a server then it could be Linux or AIX.

This is BECTA's final report [becta.org.uk], the result of a two year study. Last year, they practically begged M$ for case studies and pilot projects to prove Vista's worth. There are only two reasons M$ failed to answer BECTA's concerns:

VISTA and Office 2007 are not cost justified.

The UK school system is too small a customer for M$ to worry about.

M$ does not care about the study and they can push their software onto the UK school system anyway. This one is really condition #1.

No, three reasons:

VISTA and Office 2007 are not cost justified.

The UK school system is too small a customer for M$ to worry about.

M$ does not care about the study and they can push their software onto the UK school system anyway. This one is really condition #1.